Main | About | Tutorial | FAQ | Links | Wiki | Forum | World News | World Map | World Ranking | Nations | Electoral Calendar | Party Organizations | Treaties |
Login | Register |
Game Time: July 5475
Next month in: 03:27:28
Server time: 16:32:31, April 26, 2024 CET
Currently online (5): ADM Drax | HopesFor | Klexi | SocDemDundorfian | wstodden2 | Record: 63 on 23:13:00, July 26, 2019 CET

We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.

Bill: Upernavik/Port Prosperity Declaration of 2897

Details

Submitted by[?]: Union of Radical Republicans (UM)

Status[?]: defeated

Votes: This bill asks for an amendement to the Constitution. It will require two-thirds of the legislature to vote in favor. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.

Voting deadline: October 2901

Description[?]:

Recently there has been chatter about the disestablishment of the monarchy and the future shape of the state, with a number of allegations made about the Union of Radical Republicans' stance; we hope that this will make our position clear and less subject to shadowy allegations.

Furthermore, the state will be renamed to the Free Union of Bekenial.

Proposals

Debate

These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:

Date23:56:19, February 21, 2010 CET
FromHutorian Conservative Party
ToDebating the Upernavik/Port Prosperity Declaration of 2897
MessageBill has the support of the HNP

Date10:14:32, February 22, 2010 CET
FromConservative-Libertarian Party (UM)
ToDebating the Upernavik/Port Prosperity Declaration of 2897
MessageMadam Speaker, I am sure that the URR will understand that we could never support this bill. The only provision that we could support would be Article III.

Date14:13:45, February 26, 2010 CET
FromNorthern Arrow Party (UM)
ToDebating the Upernavik/Port Prosperity Declaration of 2897
MessageThe NAP would support this bill.

Date19:03:17, February 26, 2010 CET
FromNorthern Arrow Party (UM)
ToDebating the Upernavik/Port Prosperity Declaration of 2897
Message[OOC: Also, *Port Prosperity*? For the love of Gath.]

Date21:55:03, February 28, 2010 CET
FromHouse Lusk-Nat'l Syndicalist Party (UM)
ToDebating the Upernavik/Port Prosperity Declaration of 2897
MessageMadam Speaker, the NSP has come to the conclusion that the creation of a republic is now inevitable. We believe that a plural executive council, which does not have all members directly elected, will mitigate some of the abuses inherent in a republican system of governance. We applaud the URR for creating a system that includes this element. For this, the NSP votes for this system with a heavy heart.

Date21:59:40, February 28, 2010 CET
FromHouse Lusk-Nat'l Syndicalist Party (UM)
ToDebating the Upernavik/Port Prosperity Declaration of 2897
MessageFurthermore, Madam Speaker, this act does not abolish any of the other traditional elements of the Restoration period, but provides continuity.

Date22:09:10, February 28, 2010 CET
FromConservative-Libertarian Party (UM)
ToDebating the Upernavik/Port Prosperity Declaration of 2897
MessageMadam Speaker, it has not been explained what this system involves. Who, for instance, Madam Speaker, is the First Tribune? And why, Madam Speaker, with all due respect, do you take a place in this Council? Your role, Madam Speaker, is to represent the legislature and to ensure that backbenchers are heard and able to hold the government to account? Madam Speaker, does the Executive Council comprise solely of the two people mentioned, or are they two with many others attached? Madam Speaker, these need explaining to the House.

Madam Speaker, how the NSP can claim that there is no break with the Restoration is odd. The motto changes, the flag changes, the animal changes and the system of governance changes.

Madam Speaker, we hope that the URR or NSP can answer our questions.

Date22:11:31, February 28, 2010 CET
FromConservative-Libertarian Party (UM)
ToDebating the Upernavik/Port Prosperity Declaration of 2897
MessageAlso Madam Speaker, what would become of the royal family? Would they have any role whatsoever in the affairs of the nation? Would they be afforded state protection as has happened to the Lusk family who have a permament bodyguard paid for by the state and still have some role? Madam Speaker, we would demand that the head of the House of Hutori be given a permanent role in the affairs of the nation should this bill pass. We would request that He be made Lord President of the Council, and this be made an hereditary position.

Date22:19:11, February 28, 2010 CET
FromHouse Lusk-Nat'l Syndicalist Party (UM)
ToDebating the Upernavik/Port Prosperity Declaration of 2897
MessageMadam Speaker, we only meant that the system of honors, the parliamentary proceedings, the council system, and every other part beyond the iconography remains intact. Even the King's prerogative to grant or deny plurality voting for mayoral elections is intact.

The understanding of the Upernavik Declaration by the NSP is that the Executive Council consists only of those two individuals, who together comprise the Head of State.

The NSP supports making the King the permanent and hereditary President of the Privy Council and giving him a state bodyguard. The NSP will propose an addendum to the Upernavik Declaration to this effect.

subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe

Voting

Vote Seats
yes
  

Total Seats: 94

no
  

Total Seats: 123

abstain
    

Total Seats: 174


Random fact: Before choosing a nation, you may wish to research it first. For more information on the cultural backgrounds of the nations, please see the Cultural Protocols Index: http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=6365

Random quote: "I never dared to be radical when young. For fear it would make me conservative when old." - Robert Frost

This page was generated with PHP
Copyright 2004-2010 Wouter Lievens
Queries performed: 75